Bonfire of Creeds

First, I thought the issue is not worth the attention. Second, I thought it will die down in short time as it is too ludicrous to even think about it. And even though I still think that it is a non-issue, the reaction to it, the reaction to the cartoon of Muhammad is taking demonic shape and spreading like plague epidemic. For me, there are two questions, two central issues and I am trying to figure them out through political as well as non-political prism. First, are there any other paintings of Muhammad before this cartoon controversy? And, is it legitimate for Muslim world to demonstrate so vehemently and perhaps, so violently?

That said, even if we consider current demonstration more of political agenda, I believe that there is definitive underlying tendency in Muslim world to be angry, to be angry at everything that is non-Islamic. They completely disregard the minorities if they are in majority and if they are in minority then they make sure that they get more rights than majority. Basically, there is no equality when they have to deal with non-Muslim world.

Coming back to the two central questions, surprisingly, answer to the first question is empathetically yes. Just google the word Prophet Muhammad and you will see quite a few old paintings of Prophet Muhammad. If you don’t trust google then there is a 16^th century miniature by Sultan Muhammad-Nur Bokharai, shows Muhammad riding Buraq, a horse with face of beautiful woman, on his way to Jerusalem for his M’eraj, i.e. on his journey towards heaven. There is a painting showing Archanger Gabriel guiding Muhammad into medina. There is a 17^th century Isfahan miniature depicting the prophet with his favorite kitten, Hurairah. There is a 19^th Century painting by Kamaleddin Behzad’s miniature showing Muhammad contemplating a rose produced by a drop of sweat that fell from his face. There is a painting “Massacre of Prophets family” shows Muhammad watching as his grandson Hussein is put to death by Umayyad in Karbala. There is a 18^th century painting that shows Muhammad and his seven followers and 19^th century painting by Kamal ul-Mulk’s portrait of Muhammad showing the prophet holding the Koran in one hand while with index finger of other hand he points to the Oneness of God.

These paintings are drawn by Muslims throughout the history of Islam and across the Muslim world. They can found at various museums within the Muslim world. If this is not enough, there are many busts of Muhammad by contemporary Iranian and Arabian sculptors. U. S. Supreme court hosts a bust of Prophet, where he is honored as one of the great ‘law givers’ of mankind.

So, do they have right to protest violently? Or in fact, do they have rights to protest at all? Well, they do have right to protest, reason or no reason. But, this issue is more complicated than just violent protest. It shows the insecure mentality of leadership in Islamic world, political as well as religious. Curiously, the cartoons became a major controversy only after Organization of Islamic Committees meeting at Mecca in December. It started as usually by Saudi Arabia, who, in their attempt to out score fundamentalist (fundamentalist against fundamentalist!) recalled their ambassador from Denmark. Syria followed the suit. The agitation began systematically through out middle-east only after that. These events are in too chronological order to dismiss them as an instant reaction. May be, Islamic leadership is feeling heat from Western countries in their democratic drive and perhaps, general populace is inclining towards democratic mode of government. If that is the case then such protest are not only in vain but also painting the Muslim community in bad light.

(Historical information is courtesy of Wall Street Journal)